| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:16:02 -0800
From: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
To: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] x86: Limit the number of per cpu MCE bootup messages
Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> Mike Travis wrote:
>>
>> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> * Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> @@ -83,6 +86,7 @@
>>>> unsigned long flags;
>>>> int hdr = 0;
>>>> int i;
>>>> + char buf[120];
>>> that constant is not particularly nice, is it?
>>>
>>> Ingo
>> I'm up for suggestions. I just noticed that during testing, the
>> MCE Banks messages overflowed 80 chars but I didn't actually
>> check to see what the longest might be.
>>
>> Should I trim it to 80? Or use a different constant?
>
> I think you could calculate the size using MAX_NR_BANKS.
>
> But I'd like to change the format to shorter one at same time,
> So how about the following?
>
>
> Thanks,
> H.Seto
>
> ===
>
> [PATCH] x86, mce: rework output of MCE banks ownership information
>
> The output of MCE banks ownership information on boot tend
> to be long on new processor which has many banks:
>
> CPU 1 MCA banks SHD:0 SHD:1 CMCI:2 CMCI:3 CMCI:5 SHD:6 SHD:7 SHD:8 SHD:9 SHD:12 SHD:13 SHD:14 SHD:15 SHD:16 SHD:17 SHD:18 SHD:19 SHD:20 SHD:21
>
> This message can fill up the console output when the number
> of cpus is large.
>
> This patch suppress this info message on boot, and introduce
> debug message in shorter format instead, like:
>
> CPU 1 MCE banks map: ssCC PCss ssPP ssss ssss ss
>
> where: s: shared, C: checked by cmci, P: checked by poll.
>
> This patch still keep the info when ownership is updated.
> E.g. if a cpu take over the ownership from hot-removed cpu,
> both message will be shown:
>
> CPU 1 MCE banks map updated: CMCI:6 CMCI:7 CMCI:10 CMCI:11
> CPU 1 MCE banks map: ssCC PCCC ssPP ssCC ssss ss
>
> v2:
> - stop changing the level of message on update
> - change the number of banks message on boot to debug level
>
> Signed-off-by: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c | 6 +++---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> index 5f277ca..8627976 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce.c
> @@ -1229,11 +1229,11 @@ static int __cpuinit __mcheck_cpu_cap_init(void)
>
> b = cap & MCG_BANKCNT_MASK;
> if (!banks)
> - printk(KERN_INFO "mce: CPU supports %d MCE banks\n", b);
> + pr_debug("mce: CPU supports %d MCE banks\n", b);
>
> if (b > MAX_NR_BANKS) {
> - printk(KERN_WARNING
> - "MCE: Using only %u machine check banks out of %u\n",
> + pr_warning(
> + "MCE: Using only %u machine check banks out of %u\n",
> MAX_NR_BANKS, b);
> b = MAX_NR_BANKS;
> }
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel.c
> index 7c78563..448a38b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/mce_intel.c
> @@ -64,12 +64,25 @@ static void intel_threshold_interrupt(void)
> mce_notify_irq();
> }
>
> +static void print_banks_map(int banks)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + pr_debug("CPU %d MCE banks map:", smp_processor_id());
> + for (i = 0; i < banks; i++) {
> + pr_cont("%s%s", (i % 4) ? "" : " ",
> + test_bit(i, __get_cpu_var(mce_banks_owned)) ? "C" :
> + test_bit(i, __get_cpu_var(mce_poll_banks)) ? "P" : "s");
> + }
> + pr_cont("\n");
The problem here is that if pr_debug is not in effect, then the pr_cont("\n")
outputs a newline in the middle of other messages. I had introduced a new
macro (pr_debug_cont) but it was just as easy to buffer the message and then
print the entire thing with pr_debug().
I think pr_cont() should be reserved for when you actually want a partial
line printed before the end of the line, and not a means to stitch together
a complete line, but I may be in the minority.
This might also be another candidate for printing the needed information via
/sys or /proc ... in which case as Ingo has pointed out, the debug bootup
messages should be simple even to the point of voluminous, and the reports
compacted.
> +}
> +
> static void print_update(char *type, int *hdr, int num)
> {
> if (*hdr == 0)
> - printk(KERN_INFO "CPU %d MCA banks", smp_processor_id());
> + pr_info("CPU %d MCE banks map updated:", smp_processor_id());
> *hdr = 1;
> - printk(KERN_CONT " %s:%d", type, num);
> + pr_cont(" %s:%d", type, num);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -85,6 +98,7 @@ static void cmci_discover(int banks, int boot)
> int i;
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&cmci_discover_lock, flags);
> +
> for (i = 0; i < banks; i++) {
> u64 val;
>
> @@ -95,7 +109,7 @@ static void cmci_discover(int banks, int boot)
>
> /* Already owned by someone else? */
> if (val & CMCI_EN) {
> - if (test_and_clear_bit(i, owned) || boot)
> + if (test_and_clear_bit(i, owned) && !boot)
> print_update("SHD", &hdr, i);
> __clear_bit(i, __get_cpu_var(mce_poll_banks));
> continue;
> @@ -107,16 +121,19 @@ static void cmci_discover(int banks, int boot)
>
> /* Did the enable bit stick? -- the bank supports CMCI */
> if (val & CMCI_EN) {
> - if (!test_and_set_bit(i, owned) || boot)
> + if (!test_and_set_bit(i, owned) && !boot)
> print_update("CMCI", &hdr, i);
> __clear_bit(i, __get_cpu_var(mce_poll_banks));
> } else {
> WARN_ON(!test_bit(i, __get_cpu_var(mce_poll_banks)));
> }
> }
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cmci_discover_lock, flags);
> if (hdr)
> - printk(KERN_CONT "\n");
> + pr_cont("\n");
Here again an extraneous newline will be printed in the middle of other messages.
> + if (hdr || boot)
> + print_banks_map(banks);
> +
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cmci_discover_lock, flags);
> }
>
> /*
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists